30.06 or 308 for a Garand?

I've noticed that CMP has some Garands available in 308 as well as 30.06. I have never shot either caliber but am trying to decide which would be best. Obviously, historical accuracy would say go 30.06. But does 308 provide more choices for cartridges? Any suggestions?

If you enjoyed reading about "30.06 or 308 for a Garand?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!

TexasPatriot.308

December 26, 2012, 05:17 PM

historically accuracy goes to the '06? how come so many sniper rifles are chambered in the .308 ? I own couple M1As in .308 and a few AR10s (as in ARmalite). the Garands in WWII were '06 as was the BAR, after that, the .308s seem to be the most common accurate combat rifle.

Tempest 455

December 26, 2012, 05:21 PM

I like the 06 because that's the way most came and was the one my Dad used back then.

https://home.comcast.net/~ericdouthitt/DSCF0194.jpg

Double Vision

December 26, 2012, 05:25 PM

The only solution is to have at least one of each. :)

cfullgraf

December 26, 2012, 05:34 PM

Obviously, historical accuracy would say go 30.06. But does 308 provide more choices for cartridges? Any suggestions?

In an M1, there probably would not be much difference in performance between the two. The M1's gas system would be the limiter although with the pressure releasing gas plugs that are on the market, it does open up what commercial ammunition you can shoot in the M1.

In Service Rifle matches, the Springfield '03 was replaced by the M1 which was replaced by the M14 which was replaced by the M16/AR-15. In part, this was due to what rifle was the current issue rifle at the time. So, I do not think differences in shooting accuracy would be an issue. The 30-06 and 308 Win Garand would have the same accuracy given everything else being the same.

If you are a reloader and this is your first Garand, I would get the 30-06.

Zoogster

December 26, 2012, 05:36 PM

TexasPatriot.308 said: historically accuracy goes to the '06? how come so many sniper rifles are chambered in the .308 ?

The .308 was to allow a shorter action to be used in an auto than the 30-06 would allow while still approaching the same performance in the popular light loads of most service 30-06 loads.
(In the heavier loads the 30-06 gets ahead by a good margin.)

This would allow a shorter overal action, and easier feeding, for about the same perfomance. That is why it was adopted, it is a better fit for semi-auto box magazine fed guns.

As for the OP:

I would stick with 30-06 in a Garand. That is what they used in WW2 and were entirely reliable, the 30-06 is popular and widely available, and even today when .308/762x51 is sold out along with .223/5.56, 7.62x39, and similar cartridges widely chambered in box magazine fed guns there is plenty of 30-06 on shelves because it is not chambered in the guns people are hoarding ammo for.

They use the same bullets, and you can match or exceed the perfomance of any .308 load in the .30-06. You can use loads you couldn't in a .308.
The gun and action will be the same length anyways (since a .308 version is just a modified 30-06 one) and are you really going to rebarrel a garand in another cartridge to care about options compatible with a .308 action?

Tim the student

December 26, 2012, 08:01 PM

historically accuracy goes to the '06? how come so many sniper rifles are chambered in the .308 ?

I think he was talking about how to be the most true to what happened in the past, as opposed to talking about which round will be more precise (precision of .30-06 vs .308).

OP - I'd say get a .30-06. That is what our ancestors carried into battle. A .308 M1 is more of a novelty.

Reloadron

December 26, 2012, 08:05 PM

Since you would be buying the rifle as a shooter I would opt for the .308 Winchester (7.62 NATO). I have an M1 Garand in 30-06 as well as one in 7mm-08 (.308 necked down) as well as an M1A. While the 30-06 flavor is not all that punishing to shoot I have found the 7-08 and .308 rounds less punishing. That just being my opinion. Loading your own for either is likely 6 of one and a half dozen of the other as to military gas operated rifle service loads and buying either is also pretty much a wash as to cost. With the .308 loadings verse the 30-06 loadings you are likely giving up a few hundred FPS of muzzle velocity with heavier bullets which isn't much.

The fact that given a choice I would opt for the 7.62 NATO flavor is here nor there as it is your decision. Maybe if I did not have a Garand in 30-06 my thinking would be different. Then I might opt for the 30-06. Your rifle and your call.

Ron

W.E.G.

December 26, 2012, 08:50 PM

I don't think the .308 offers any advantage whatsoever in the Garand.

There is still a LOT of surplus ammo in both calibers available.
Prices are comparable (equally-expensive) these days.

The difference in cost for handloading is miniscule.
If you use 3 grains less powder to load the .308, you would need to shoot 2,333 rounds of .308 to recoup the cost of only one pound of powder by comparison to the 30-06.

Otherwise, they use the same bullet and primer.

I do like the "get both" idea.
However, having personally accumulated far more guns than I can possibly shoot on any regular basis, I am well-acquainted with the corollary:
"You can't shoot both of them at the same time."

Also the axiom:
If you take both of them to the range, you have twice as much work on your hands to clean them up afterwards.

And do not forget the all-encompassing truth:
It takes 10x the amount of work to get rid of a good gun "the right way" than it does to acquire it in the first place.

cmars

December 26, 2012, 11:28 PM

well depends on what your planning on doing with a Garand if you want a piece to collect and occasionally shoot go for 30-06 since the ammo is not cheap but you will have a very historic rifle or if you want to have a rifle that you do not care about the historic value but you want to shoot a lot go for 308 due to the price of ammo. It is your choice but these are just practical hints

carbine85

December 27, 2012, 10:59 AM

If you don't have an original Garand in 30-06 I would get. It's one of the greatest rifles ever built. I have 2 so my next purchase is the CMP .308 Garand. They are supposes to shoot as well as the M1A and they cost less. You can't get into a decent M1A for under $1500.00.

Mencius

December 27, 2012, 11:36 AM

I am a definite Garand newbie. Was the original 30-06 Garand modified to shoot the 308 or was the receiver, etc. built from the ground up to shoot 308?

nfafan

December 27, 2012, 12:02 PM

"I am a definite Garand newbie. Was the original 30-06 Garand modified to shoot the 308 or was the receiver, etc. built from the ground up to shoot 308? "

Modified by the service armories - originally for the most part for use by their marksmanship teams until the M14 was eventually used.
USNavy originally tried a .308 chamber sleeve and clip-follower(?) to allow for case lengths, then switched to correct .308 chambered/barreled recvrs and a few other small mods like the clip follower, maybe op-rod spring. Don't use the .308 chamber sleeve if you find one - too iffy.

I have a "spare" CMP M1 that I was planning to have properly converted to .308; due to the cost and wider availability of .MIL grade .308 ammo, as opposed to "correct" M2-spec 30.06 FMJ for the base M1.
If I had known the CMP was going to start selling .308 M1's - I'd have waited.

Meanwhile, you can get a 30.06 M1 and buy one of the "adjustable gas plugs" to allow use of a wider range of commercial 30.06 that you can come accross.

gondorian

December 27, 2012, 12:20 PM

I went for 30-06. The ammo cost is about the same, plus you can get 30-06 in so many places if you need too, even during the panic of right now. It is a good idea to get an adjustable gas plug so you can shoot commercial ammo without damaging your op-rod. I have one and it lets you shoot 180 grain loads easily. You probably could go heavier and slower but I don't reload (yet) so I don't know for sure.

45crittergitter

December 29, 2012, 08:52 PM

Now if someone would make an M1A in .30-06....

HKGuns

December 29, 2012, 09:57 PM

30-06 as it was originally designed.

ApacheCoTodd

December 30, 2012, 10:19 AM

I have them in both and really only have two observations to make:

The en-bloc clips look oh-so-right filled with -06 pills, .308? Not so much. Subjective but, there you go.

If you go .308 be sure to get a mag well filler block to keep the -06s out.

Then this: Given the wide variety of .308 floating around my place, I fear loading up the hot stuff from time to time and using up a Garand with it.

Nothing at all wrong with a .308 Garand - just have a care s to what you feed it.

Onmilo

December 30, 2012, 12:02 PM

.30/06 as it was originally designed
Actually Mr. Garand originally designed the rifle for the .276 Pedersen cartridge.

Want to shoot commercial ammunition in a Garand?
No problem, you can:
A. Buy an adjustable gas lock screw or you can:
B. Drill the Poppet valve out of the gas lock screw and use the rifle as a straight pull manually operated bolt action.

I own and shoot M1s in both .30/06 and 7.62X51 and do so with surplus and commercial ammunition.
Never bent an operating rod or cracked a receiver.

bobinoregon

December 30, 2012, 12:29 PM

I've had a Springfield rebuild in 308 for years. I'm not really concerned if it's exactly correct ammunition wise, it's a Garand and it's mine and there never was any plan of ever selling it. Cost wise the difference in ammunition is nothing cause I make my own. Never shot a 30-06 version but I am happy with the 308.

joeschmoe

December 30, 2012, 12:31 PM

Don't convert 'em. Either a true .308 build or original flavor 30.06. If it's an older gun, leave it in 30.06. If buying a newly build one, then order it in .308.
Conversions have a bad rep and make collectors angry.

TonyInFla

December 30, 2012, 02:41 PM

I recently bought my first Garand from my step father. It's a little rough in the looks department but it's a great shooter. it's also a 308. I really like mine.

Reloadron

December 30, 2012, 03:45 PM

Don't convert 'em. Either a true .308 build or original flavor 30.06. If it's an older gun, leave it in 30.06. If buying a newly build one, then order it in .308.
Conversions have a bad rep and make collectors angry.

I am not sure about some of what you are saying. To the best of my knowledge, every M1 Garand manufactured, with the exceptions of early development rifles was chambered in 30-06. That includes the NM rifles built in the late 50s. Now if that is correct then any M1 Garand chambered in 7.62 NATO is a conversion. No original M1 Garand left a US arsenal (Springfield Armory) or contractor's factory ( Winchester WWII) or H&R (Harrington Richardson), IHC (International Harvester) post WWII chambered in 7.62 NATO. While in 1964 the Springfield Armory did a REPORT OF EVALUATION ON NAVY CONVERSION 0F RIFLE, U. S. CAL . 30, Ml TO FIRE 7 .62MM AMMUNITION BY MODIFICATION TO THE BARREL, I don't believe the conversions were actually done by the Springfield Armory. The report did pretty much show that a barrel sleeve was not a good idea and that the best approach was to use a barrel originally cut and chambered in 7.62 NATO. These conversions were also taking place long after the last M1 Garand was produced.

As to not converting a M1 Garand to .308 I see no reason not to. The rifles manufactured during WWII have a high collector value but only if the rifle is 100% correct as to each and every part. In the case of an early 100% correct rifle then yes, it would be foolish to convert a sought after collectable. However, the recent CMP rifles classified as "Correct Grade" were in the serial number range of 5.4 to 5.8 million making them well post Korea rifles starting around maybe 6/54. While a rifle like this may be correct as to parts these later rifles really don't command much of a premium as to collector value. Even their stocks at that point were the standard DoD cartouche. Rifles like these in my opinion are shooters rather than sought after collectables. The IHC and H&R rifles do command a slight premium of the later rifles simply because there were fewer produced. Again, even on these rifles they must be correct as to all parts to be of any value to a collector.

So in conclusion I see nothing wrong with converting a later 1950s rifle to the 7.62 NATO chambering. A serious collector is not likely to have much interest in the rifle anyway. If the rifle is to be enjoyed as a shooter it matters not in my opinion and granted just my opinion.

Just My Take
Ron

cfullgraf

December 30, 2012, 04:46 PM

To the best of my knowledge, every M1 Garand manufactured, with the exceptions of early development rifles was chambered in 30-06. That includes the NM rifles built in the late 50s. Now if that is correct then any M1 Garand chambered in 7.62 NATO is a conversion. No original M1 Garand left a US arsenal (Springfield Armory) or contractor's factory ( Winchester WWII) or H&R (Harrington Richardson), IHC (International Harvester) post WWII chambered in 7.62 NATO.

Yes, I believe all production M1s were chamber originally in 30-06. There were some early development rifles and some rifles used as test rifles after WWII that were chamber in other cartridges but they really did not have the "M1" designation.

As to not converting a M1 Garand to .308 I see no reason not to. The rifles during WWII have a high collector value but only if the rifle is 100% correct as to each and every part.

If you consider then total number of Garands out there in public hands, the numbers are probably greater than the total production run of some civilian rifles that command very little premium in value.

Six million or so Garands were made from the late 30's to the late 50's and if even just a million survive, that is a bunch.

There are very few WWII Garands that did not go through a rebuild at sometime in their life so getting one with "correct" parts is slim. Even slimmer, is getting one that was not restored to "correct" by some one. So, a run of the mill Garand's value really will not rise much very quickly.

Since a converted to 308 Winchester is a version of the Garand used by our government, I also see no reason to not convert a mixmaster Garand as long as it has no other collector's or historic value.

Vern Humphrey

December 30, 2012, 05:33 PM

historically accuracy goes to the '06?

He said, "historical accuracy goes to the '06." Meaning that for virtually all of its combat experience, the M1 was chambered for the '06, and hence an '06 would be more in keeping with the rifle's role in history.

nbkky71

December 30, 2012, 06:17 PM

I own and shoot M1s in both .30/06 and 7.62X51 and do so with surplus and commercial ammunition.

I had an accurized M1 built in .308 and occassionally shoot it in NRA/CMP highpower matches. I had it built in .308 so I could share ammo with my M1A. I also have several M1's in the original .30-06 caliber and use them to shoot JCG matches.

Unless you have a need to go with .308, I'd stick with .30-06

HKGuns

December 31, 2012, 12:24 AM

Actually Mr. Garand originally designed the rifle for the .276 Pedersen cartridge.

You are correct of course, but you know what I meant.

joeschmoe

December 31, 2012, 12:57 AM

I am not sure about some of what you are saying. To the best of my knowledge, every M1 Garand manufactured, with the exceptions of early development rifles was chambered in 30-06. That includes the NM rifles built in the late 50s. Now if that is correct then any M1 Garand chambered in 7.62 NATO is a conversion. No original M1 Garand left a US arsenal (Springfield Armory) or contractor's factory ( Winchester WWII) or H&R (Harrington Richardson), IHC (International Harvester) post WWII chambered in 7.62 NATO. While in 1964 the Springfield Armory did a REPORT OF EVALUATION ON NAVY CONVERSION 0F RIFLE, U. S. CAL . 30, Ml TO FIRE 7 .62MM AMMUNITION BY MODIFICATION TO THE BARREL, I don't believe the conversions were actually done by the Springfield Armory. The report did pretty much show that a barrel sleeve was not a good idea and that the best approach was to use a barrel originally cut and chambered in 7.62 NATO. These conversions were also taking place long after the last M1 Garand was produced.

As to not converting a M1 Garand to .308 I see no reason not to. The rifles manufactured during WWII have a high collector value but only if the rifle is 100% correct as to each and every part. In the case of an early 100% correct rifle then yes, it would be foolish to convert a sought after collectable. However, the recent CMP rifles classified as "Correct Grade" were in the serial number range of 5.4 to 5.8 million making them well post Korea rifles starting around maybe 6/54. While a rifle like this may be correct as to parts these later rifles really don't command much of a premium as to collector value. Even their stocks at that point were the standard DoD cartouche. Rifles like these in my opinion are shooters rather than sought after collectables. The IHC and H&R rifles do command a slight premium of the later rifles simply because there were fewer produced. Again, even on these rifles they must be correct as to all parts to be of any value to a collector.

So in conclusion I see nothing wrong with converting a later 1950s rifle to the 7.62 NATO chambering. A serious collector is not likely to have much interest in the rifle anyway. If the rifle is to be enjoyed as a shooter it matters not in my opinion and granted just my opinion.

Just My Take
Ron
Reread my post.

I said "original" 30.06... but if you build a new one... CMP or Fulton will build you a .308 or 30.06. With out the conversion chamber insert. With a newly made gun you can have it made with a real .308 barrel or a real 30.06 barrel... for a NEW Garand.

Reloadron

December 31, 2012, 05:02 AM

Reread my post.

I said "original" 30.06... but if you build a new one... CMP or Fulton will build you a .308 or 30.06. With out the conversion chamber insert. With a newly made gun you can have it made with a real .308 barrel or a real 30.06 barrel... for a NEW Garand.
Now I understand what you were saying, understanding the original 30-06 part. Sorry I misunderstood.

Ron

Vern Humphrey

December 31, 2012, 10:26 AM

Quote:
Actually Mr. Garand originally designed the rifle for the .276 Pedersen cartridge.

You are correct of course, but you know what I meant.
Well, yes and no. Pedersen had convinced Ordnance to adopt his .276 cartridge -- one of his reasons being that his rifle design proved incapable of handling the more powerful .30-06. Garand was therefore forced to design his rifle around that round.

But when MacArthur overrode Ordnance (for very good reasons), Pedersen dropped out and Garand redesigned his rifle for the .30-06.

Consequently, there are only a pair of tool room models in .276, and millions of Garands redesigned and re-dimensioned for .30-06. So it is not wrong to say the M1 (which was what the rifle was designated upon actual adoption) was designed for the .30-06.

Neo-Luddite

December 31, 2012, 10:35 AM

Go for .06. With a $15 chamber insert and some permatex it can be temporarily or semi-perm converted to .308. With a broken shell extractor, the insert comes out and - back to .06. That means when ammo might be scarce, your beast eats 2 calibers.

.06 beats .308 in the M-1 AND lawfully, m2 .30/06 AP ammo is exempt by SPECIFIC ATF ruling but NOT .308. Minor in most places, but in some places (like my IL home) the .308 AP ain't legal - but .06 is. Plus , you can get .06 from the CMP at good prices and at days end, .06 is about 8-9 % more powerful. Plus, to me, the .06 recoil feels more elongated and softer. .
.308 is a fine caliber ~ the son of the .06. But here in the US, .06 is still 'king of the hill' in terms of number of cartridges produced for the civie market; so it makes sense in that regard too.

USSR

December 31, 2012, 04:14 PM

Go for .06. With a $15 chamber insert and some permatex it can be temporarily or semi-perm converted to .308. With a broken shell extractor, the insert comes out and - back to .06. That means when ammo might be scarce, your beast eats 2 calibers.

Uh, don't be so sure about that. Years ago I bought one of those inserts, and couldn't get it to work with several rifles I owned. I sent it back and got a replacement, and that one didn't work either.

Don

anothernewb

December 31, 2012, 04:20 PM

Have to say, a buddy bought one of the CMP garands chambered in 308 and it is a really, really nice rifle. It's not a historical piece by any means but it sure is enjoyable to shoot, and very accurate. Handles off the shelf ammo with ease

Neo-Luddite

December 31, 2012, 06:58 PM

USSR: in fairness, I've got one but have not wanted to use it as I prefer .06 and didn't have much interest in playing with it unless needed in a ammo shortage pinch. Thanls for the insight. BTW - if you have time -why didn't it work do you think?

Reloadron

December 31, 2012, 08:29 PM

The 30-06 cartridge has MAXIMUM CARTRIDGE / MINIMUM CHAMBER specifications which can be seen here (http://www.saami.org/pubresources/cc_drawings/Rifle/30-06%20Springfield.pdf) with the cartridge specifications. All of the dimensions are subject to allowable tolerances. So chamber dimensions can vary from rifle to rifle but still be in tolerance. This makes it a little difficult to make a one size fits all chamber adapter or sleeve. Thus chamber adapters can prove to be unreliable depending on the dimensions of the chamber it is inserted in. Another problem is the bullet jump, the distance the bullet travels before it engages the lands and grooves. That can lead to accuracy problems. Going from a 30-06 to a .308 will result in considerable bullet jump. There can also be issues of feeding and ejecting cartridges. This link (http://www.odcmp.com/Sales/pdfs/NavyGarand762ConversionReport.pdf) contains a summary of the Navy Conversion Experiment during the early 60s.

Personally I have never been a fan of the things.

Ron

Havok7416

January 1, 2013, 12:52 AM

My vote is for the .30-06 if only because both the rifles and ammo selection are more plentiful.

USSR

January 1, 2013, 10:31 AM

USSR: in fairness, I've got one but have not wanted to use it as I prefer .06 and didn't have much interest in playing with it unless needed in a ammo shortage pinch. Thanls for the insight. BTW - if you have time -why didn't it work do you think?

Don't know. Thought I just got a bad one, but when the second one didn't work...? Tried it in both my Garand and 03-A3, and couldn't get the bolt to close in either. I guess it's just one of those things that looks good on paper, but with both cartridge and chamber variances what they are...

Don

Neo-Luddite

January 1, 2013, 10:42 AM

Thanks for the reply and insight ~ happy new year!

Reloadron

January 1, 2013, 11:50 AM

Go for .06. With a $15 chamber insert and some permatex it can be temporarily or semi-perm converted to .308. With a broken shell extractor, the insert comes out and - back to .06. That means when ammo might be scarce, your beast eats 2 calibers.

.06 beats .308 in the M-1 AND lawfully, m2 .30/06 AP ammo is exempt by SPECIFIC ATF ruling but NOT .308. Minor in most places, but in some places (like my IL home) the .308 AP ain't legal - but .06 is. Plus , you can get .06 from the CMP at good prices and at days end, .06 is about 8-9 % more powerful. Plus, to me, the .06 recoil feels more elongated and softer. .
.308 is a fine caliber ~ the son of the .06. But here in the US, .06 is still 'king of the hill' in terms of number of cartridges produced for the civie market; so it makes sense in that regard too.
I have to respectfully disagree with you on a few things.

When the Navy conducted their experiments with chamber adapters or chamber sleeves during the early 1960s they came up as a big failure and I linked to the document concerning the test results and why these devices, using a technical term, just plain sucked.

One big problem with a chamber adapter in this particular case is free bore or bullet jump as the distance a bullet must travel before engaging the lands and grooves of the barrel. A 30-06 loaded with a 150 grain FMJBT has a Cartridge OAL of about 3.250". A .308 loaded with that same 150 grain FMJBT has a Cartridge OAL of about 2.775". That leaves a free bore or bullet jump increase of about 0.475" or .025" short of being 1/2". Considering most shooters of match type military rifles like the M1 Garand and M1A (M14) load for 0" free bore I don't see where almost 1/2" of free bore can be a good thing and has to cause accuracy to suffer. With hunting rifles a little free bore is a good thing but certainly not 1/2" of it. That being excessive even in a hunting rifle in my opinion.

As to .308 performance being compared to the 30-06 and the 30-06 winning hands down that is true but only to an extent as there is more to it.

Though frequently compared to it, the .308 cannot match the performance of the 30-06. The difference between the two, however, is insignificant unless bullets of 180 grains or heavier are discussed. The 30-06 greater cartridge capacity and ability to use slower powders give it an undeniable edge.

Taken from the .308 load data in the Sierra loading manual 50th anniversary edition.

I can't see any application where a shooter would be shooting bullets with a weight exceeding 180 grains in an M1 Garand or even a M1A for that matter. That being of my way of thinking, so there is no real performance difference between shooting a .308 or 30-06 cartridge in an M1 Garand with bullet weights below 180 grains and shooting bullet weights above 180 grains can be unhealthy for the rifle and the shooter.

Enter M1 Garand Adjustable Gas Nuts. (M1 Garand Adjustable Gas Nuts:)

Made from hardened tool steel and parkerized. Service rifle legal! Has the same appearance and configuration as original; CMP 4th Edition #4-13-2-b.
By adjusting the volume of gas in the cylinder you change the speed of the op-rod and the harmonics of the barrel.
If you want to tame things down, it can be opened up just enough to function, or opened fully for single shot functionality.
If you are working on your own hand loads, a quarter turn WILL affect group size.
If you have a 308 Garand this is a necessity if you want to safely shoot heavier 168 grain match bullets.

A slick little device but I still don't see bullets with a weight exceeding 180 grains being fired in an M1 Garand so the .308 and 30-06 are still pretty much on par as to what they can get done in the rifle. Gas relief valves like the above are made by a few manufacturers and an overall good investment. They are also legal for CMP matches.

I agree that 30-06 ammunition is more prevalent in smaller retail outlets, but will it always be the 30-06 flavors you want to cycle in your M1 Garand?

Just My Take....
Ron

Vern Humphrey

January 1, 2013, 03:30 PM

Quote:
Go for .06. With a $15 chamber insert and some permatex it can be temporarily or semi-perm converted to .308. With a broken shell extractor, the insert comes out and - back to .06. That means when ammo might be scarce, your beast eats 2 calibers.

Uh, don't be so sure about that. Years ago I bought one of those inserts, and couldn't get it to work with several rifles I owned. I sent it back and got a replacement, and that one didn't work either.
The Navy used chamber inserts for a while -- cheaper than buying M14s. But they found that sometimes the chamber insert got extracted along with the fired case, resulting in an interesting event when the next shot was fired. I personally would avoid them in the M1 or any other semi-automatic weapon.

Welding Rod

January 1, 2013, 11:46 PM

30-06

Easier to find the bigger brass on the ground, and easier to handle during reloading.

Neo-Luddite

January 2, 2013, 05:59 PM

Yeh, I'm with you guys on all of the above. I've never had any desire to experiment with the .308 insert. And no, I made the mistake (as a new Garand owner) of putting 180 grain through the M-1 and trashing a (probably marginal by then) gas system in 1992. 165 works fine. The difference between .06 and .308 is the stuff of gun nut hair splitting and we all know it. I started with .06 and the M-1 was a cheap substitutre (at the time) for the m1a I couldn't afford. twenty odd years on, I'm happy with my stable of 2 M-1's in .06 and other 'lesser' weapons that go bang. So I guess if someone had another weapon in .308 it would make sense to have the M-1 in that caliber so they could eat from the same trough.

If you enjoyed reading about "30.06 or 308 for a Garand?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!